From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <9front-bounces@9front.inri.net>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,
	HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,
	UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Received: from 9front.inri.net (9front.inri.net [168.235.81.73])
	by inbox.vuxu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DFB12B44C
	for <ml@inbox.vuxu.org>; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 00:27:57 +0100 (CET)
Received: from wopr.sciops.net ([216.126.196.60]) by 9front; Sun Mar 10 19:26:41 -0400 2024
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sciops.net; s=20210706;
	t=1710113187;
	h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id:
	 to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
	 in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references;
	bh=yGyRee43f/SpQeVJS+sRKv/vOSvvuZUFEMUsM1574Vc=;
	b=dyEdCwVaiP69uhz9jfnW0A83dxRUpYpjSNaOXFxtDchA1hpmEa8aQHkhe+8UCToj8ravHz
	BFzAQE/38wcJ0R1LEf4/StGn54LFAFkFEBgAG4HbxcwGItyZRxxIAZ10V8I3eo18xEtfz2
	tv6oYrejNb00GlZ9eQ6SXixvQVmQK/4=
Received: from localhost (wopr.sciops.net [local])
	by wopr.sciops.net (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPA id 5000d8df
	for <9front@9front.org>;
	Sun, 10 Mar 2024 16:26:27 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2024 16:26:27 -0700
From: Kurt H Maier <khm@sciops.net>
To: 9front@9front.org
Message-ID: <Ze5Bo3ehQQ5rpBRe@wopr>
Mail-Followup-To: 9front@9front.org
References: <17101116980.dc049.73423@lsd.chicago.il.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <17101116980.dc049.73423@lsd.chicago.il.us>
List-ID: <9front.9front.org>
List-Help: <http://lists.9front.org>
X-Glyph: ➈
X-Bullshit: blockchain hosting standard 
Subject: Re: [9front] Is 9front Generally Considered To Be The Successor To
 Plan9?
Reply-To: 9front@9front.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Mar 10, 2024 at 06:01:38PM -0500, Jay F. Shachter wrote:
> 
> This is a 9front mailing list, to which Plan9 questions are routinely
> asked (e.g., "What is the Plan 9 equivalent of uname?").
> 
> Is 9front widely considered to be the successor to Plan9, in the sense
> that, e.g., Fortran90 is the successor to Fortran77, such that answers
> descriptive of Fortran90 can be given to a question about "Fortran"?
> Similarly, can an answer descriptive of 9front be given to a question
> about Plan9?  Or are there other incompatible operating systems that
> claim to be the successor to Plan9?

Fortan has a standards body.  Plan 9 does not.  I don't believe 9front
is generally considered at all, much less generally considered to be
anything.

> (Parenthetically, and completely off-topic for this mailing list, the
> most recent standardized version of Fortran is Fortran2023, but does
> anyone in the real world actually use a version of Fortran that is
> less than 34 years old?)

Yes.  The E3SM model uses Fortran95 with a subset of Fortran2003. 

khm